Comments on: 2008, not 1984

2008, not 1984

caddis — Sun, 18 Mar 2007 16:53:39 -0800

Vote different. Unauthorized Internet ad for Obama converts Apple Computer's '84 Super Bowl spot into a generational howl against Clinton's presidential bid. more

By: DU

DU — Sun, 18 Mar 2007 17:05:15 -0800

Obama is better than Hillary, but he's not the MacOS to her DOS.

By: IronLizard

IronLizard — Sun, 18 Mar 2007 17:06:55 -0800

Orwell would approve.

By: StopMakingSense

StopMakingSense — Sun, 18 Mar 2007 17:09:45 -0800

Really? Really?

By: I Foody

I Foody — Sun, 18 Mar 2007 17:11:49 -0800

Adding in an ipod must have been hard.

By: mmahaffie

mmahaffie — Sun, 18 Mar 2007 17:13:11 -0800

Oh... I really wonder who exactly is behind this. I could see this as coming from anywhere for any one of a dozen reasons. Some obvious, some hidden.

By: moonbird

moonbird — Sun, 18 Mar 2007 17:16:16 -0800

~~Oh, this can't end well~~ Censored. Doubleplus ungood.

By: George_Spiggott

George_Spiggott — Sun, 18 Mar 2007 17:21:02 -0800

I'm not enthusiastic about Hillary but that was really vacuous. They took a clip of her delivering a positive message -- if lacking much substance -- with a fair degree of warmth, and tried to cast it in an evil light using someone else's production. Gee, brilliant. A step up from placing her at the head of a Nuremberg rally, I suppose. And does the bombshell athlete with the hammer really represent Barack in anyone's mind? How so, exactly?

By: fandango_matt

fandango_matt — Sun, 18 Mar 2007 17:21:02 -0800

iBama.

By: caddis

caddis — Sun, 18 Mar 2007 17:23:40 -0800

By: inconsequentialist

inconsequentialist — Sun, 18 Mar 2007 17:28:20 -0800

I think it may have worked better as an anti-Bush ad.

By: mediareport

mediareport — Sun, 18 Mar 2007 17:36:19 -0800

I love it. Of course it's vacuous, it's a political ad. But it stings in the right places.

By: matt_od

matt_od — Sun, 18 Mar 2007 17:38:49 -0800

the odd thing is they used the 20th anniversary version of that commercial, not the original one. hence the ipod.

By: Frank Grimes

Frank Grimes — Sun, 18 Mar 2007 17:39:59 -0800

The 1984 presidential election had Reagan with 49 states over Mondale (Minnesota and D.C.). Jesse Jackson was the Democratic candidate from Illinois. Caddis nailed it. YouTube will play a huge part in this election. People can be "swiftboated" at a fraction of the cost.

By: Civil_Disobedient

Civil_Disobedient — Sun, 18 Mar 2007 17:43:49 -0800

It amazes me that people give Hillary the credit of having any relevance in today's political world. Seriously. I was in Nebraska a couple of years ago at a rodeo and the rodeo clown was cracking Hillary jokes, garnering much hooting and applause, while I looked on in utter disbelief. At least there I could understand it--they'll probably be telling Hillary jokes until 2050. But I expected better from the internets.

By: mediareport

mediareport — Sun, 18 Mar 2007 17:48:00 -0800

I expected better from the internets. !

By: octothorpe

octothorpe — Sun, 18 Mar 2007 17:52:05 -0800

Meh, pretty much off target. I'm not that big a Clinton fan but Hillary as Big Brother? Maybe in some crazed Redstate.com minds but they wouldn't be voting for Obama either. Lame.

By: dbiedny

dbiedny — Sun, 18 Mar 2007 17:55:29 -0800

Recycled Shit Sandwich.

By: ZachsMind

ZachsMind — Sun, 18 Mar 2007 17:57:59 -0800

This is actually the kinda thing Democrats were trying to do to Bush eight years ago. "Don't believe his lies! He's a wolf in sheep's clothing! He pretends to be warm and good-hearted and just common old family folk but he came from a rich college and his daddy's an oil tycoon. He's evil I tell you!" Eight years before that the donkeys were doing it to Reagan. This just looks like the donkeys are turning on their own, and that ain't purty.

By: grobstein

grobstein — Sun, 18 Mar 2007 18:05:20 -0800

"Stunning"? "Creative"? I hope that article isn't representative.

By: Huplescat

Huplescat — Sun, 18 Mar 2007 18:06:56 -0800

Meh.... Republicans lust after either Hillary or Obama as the 2008 opposition like a kid who can't wait for Christmas. A pox on both their shamelessly equivocating houses, anyway. They get a lot coverage because they are easy to hook a story to, and the corporate media doesn't find them threatening.

By: IronLizard

IronLizard — Sun, 18 Mar 2007 18:07:27 -0800

This just looks like the donkeys are turning on their own, and that ain't purty. But don't they always do that, anyway?

By: caddis

caddis — Sun, 18 Mar 2007 18:08:17 -0800

dbiedny - you are metafilter's shit sandwich

By: dbiedny

dbiedny — Sun, 18 Mar 2007 18:09:19 -0800

caddis - it's a tough gig, but someone's gotta do it. Long Live The Tap!

By: inconsequentialist

inconsequentialist — Sun, 18 Mar 2007 18:12:02 -0800

It has dramatized a brave new world in which passionate activists outside the structure of traditional campaigns have the power to shape the message -- even for a presidential candidate. An ironic take on this ad.

By: caddis

caddis — Sun, 18 Mar 2007 18:12:47 -0800

It would be nice to see a positive contribution out of you every now and then other than dropping in with insults, mostly the boring ss. How pathetic is that? I expected a lot of crap in a post like this because so many people love/hate Hillary, but at least show a little creativity, if you have any.

By: Simon!

Simon! — Sun, 18 Mar 2007 18:16:56 -0800

I don't remotely remember that, ZachsMind. I remember an awful lot of "Har har, he's just a stupid cowboy," and a bare minimum of "He's a wealthy Yale graduate from Connecticut who pretends to be folksy because he thinks you're kind of stupid." I'm not saying the latter would have been any more relevant, but it would have been a little less embarrassing.

By: ZachsMind

ZachsMind — Sun, 18 Mar 2007 18:22:22 -0800

"But don't they always do that, anyway?" Well Iron Lizard, since I can't see a difference between the donkeys, the elephants, and the other animals on that farm in Washington DC, beyond the superficiality of it all, yeah, I guess they do. They play shirts and skins and we watch like lemmings and sheep for the sheer entertainment value. Make no mistake though, whether we vote for Hillary or Obama or the cute blonde chick running in that commercial - it won't make a lick of difference, and it hasn't for quite some time. There's someone or something behind the curtain, to whom we're not to pay attention. The bottom line is to follow the money. This country is in debt to its eyeballs. Just who the hell do we owe that Federal Deficit to? Who are we in hock to, and would be unable to pay if they sent DC the bill tomorrow? Who actually owns this country? The real reason why we don't look behind that curtain? We don't wanna know.

By: dw

dw — Sun, 18 Mar 2007 18:23:30 -0800

I don't get it. Hillary == Big Brother? It's not the Best of ~~the Web~~ the Politics.

By: five fresh fish

five fresh fish — Sun, 18 Mar 2007 18:23:51 -0800

This just looks like the donkeys are turning on their own, and that ain't purty. Meh. Maybe it's that "they" are turning "on the political creeps." There are way too many people in it for personal gain, and too few in it to ensure the country and society excel to the benefit of all. The country has immense wealth. It is being looted to the benefit of an elite few, when it could be being used to promote the health, education, and opportunity of and for all. I'm hoping people are beginning to realize that, and come to realize that the traditional politicians are the cause of the problems today. It is time to elect someone different. i have no idea whatsoever whether obama qualifies as 'different'

By: Wataki

Wataki — Sun, 18 Mar 2007 18:30:59 -0800

I think that informed YouTube user ray700s said it best: great use of video imagery,all of the zombies are hypnotized by the demofag media bullshit telling people that Mrs. Anti-Christ has already won the election.Don't underestimate the demofags especially since they have the Anti-Christ(her husband)working for them behind the scenes pulling strings. Mm. I think there's something in that for everyone.

By: dw

dw — Sun, 18 Mar 2007 18:33:56 -0800

The interesting thing about ads like this is how the introduction of an essentially free distribution network changes things. Other than grabbing press attention, in the past you had to pay to get a message like this out. I expect that someone will be drafted to run online, then laid low by the same tools used to draft them into the race. I.e., I think we're going to have the first presidential campaign that starts and ends online. The interesting thing is that as the so-called blogosphere begins to fragment and the "echo chamber" wing moves to Twitter and the cooler apps that will replace Twitter later this year, the "writer" wing, with its 500-2000 word impassioned pleas and original content, will start to move to the front. I think you'll see two strategies in 2008 -- campaigns hiring bloggers (e.g. what Edwards tried to do with Marcotts) and campaigns using social networks and relays (e.g. a candidate uses MySpace and Twitter and SMS to relay campaign information). Of course, in order to get grandpa, you just stick a commercial on the nightly news saying that Hillary/Giuliani/Obama/McCain is out to cut their Social Security check and sell America out to the Soviets. I just can't see Grandma Twittering all her friends "HILLARY IS IN UR WHITE HOUSE CUTTING UR MEDICARE."

By: delmoi

delmoi — Sun, 18 Mar 2007 18:35:45 -0800

Meh.... Republicans lust after either Hillary or Obama as the 2008 opposition like a kid who can't wait for Christmas. What are you talking about? They fear Hillary more then Obama, but I don't think they imagine either one of them will be easy to beat.

By: delmoi

delmoi — Sun, 18 Mar 2007 18:41:13 -0800

The bottom line is to follow the money. This country is in debt to its eyeballs. Just who the hell do we owe that Federal Deficit to? Who are we in hock to, and would be unable to pay if they sent DC the bill tomorrow? Who actually owns this country? Whoever owns federal bonds. Mostly regular American citizens.

By: mrbill

mrbill — Sun, 18 Mar 2007 18:51:24 -0800

I'm an Obama fan (just finished reading his second book), and I admire the video editing work, but whoever did this could have had a better Big Brother choice than Hillary.

By: allen.spaulding

allen.spaulding — Sun, 18 Mar 2007 19:10:54 -0800

Metafilter: Demofag media bullshit

By: owhydididoit

owhydididoit — Sun, 18 Mar 2007 19:24:17 -0800

It's pretty but it really doesn't say much.

By: SeizeTheDay

SeizeTheDay — Sun, 18 Mar 2007 19:26:04 -0800

YouTube will play a huge part in this election. People can be "swiftboated" at a fraction of the cost. I'm sorry, but what kind of crazy glue have you been sniffing lately? The Swift Boat ads were nationally televised on TVs. (TVs are still the most ubiquitous form of an advertising medium.) And, the demographic of those who vote still skews toward the elderly. And as far as I can tell, grandma and grandpa are surfing the web checking out the latest YouTube video. Not to mention the fact that the internet is a far more reactive medium to disinformation than the television. While it would take days, if not weeks, to correct a false ad on TV, it takes hours for an internet farce to be fleshed out. This sort of video is fun and trendy and interesting, but has no influence. It's just fancy videography for the sake of a few. Teenie boppers and "hip 20 somethings" aren't voting. Gen X is still the most cynical, and useless, generation in US existence and despite what occurs on the internet, at the end of the day, television and newspaper ads and stories will still decide the election. (BTW, I'm aware of a growing trend of Gen Ys that are becoming hyper-religious, hyper-involved in their community, etc, but I'm curious to know if that's just a fad to sell Atlantic Monthlies or if there's really a trend here.)

By: SeizeTheDay

SeizeTheDay — Sun, 18 Mar 2007 19:32:07 -0800

The bottom line is to follow the money. This country is in debt to its eyeballs. Just who the hell do we owe that Federal Deficit to? Who are we in hock to, and would be unable to pay if they sent DC the bill tomorrow? Who actually owns this country? BTW. ZachsMind, a cursory search can lead to the answer, instead of indulging in your hysteria.

By: SeizeTheDay

SeizeTheDay — Sun, 18 Mar 2007 19:36:12 -0800

Sorry, grandma and grandpa aren't surfing the web...

By: Huplescat

Huplescat — Sun, 18 Mar 2007 19:38:38 -0800

delmoi, yes I am. You need to get out more. Or maybe you could just watch a John Wayne or Bruce Willis movie. The people love those fantasies of a regular guy beating the crap out of people who are way too smart by half. In any case, both Hillary and Obama have significant, compromising corporate ties... Hillary to pretty much everything, and Barack to Archer-Daniels-Midland.

By: mediareport

mediareport — Sun, 18 Mar 2007 19:44:00 -0800

whoever did this could have had a better Big Brother choice than Hillary Nah, the problem is in the particular quotes they used; it would have been a lot better with her ridiculous Iraq justifications. That the anonymous folks who put it together *didn't* use that issue almost certainly means the ad's "mystery creator" was another mainstream Democratic political consultant. Still, it's a pretty effective way of attacking the anointed frontrunner.

By: the other side

the other side — Sun, 18 Mar 2007 19:56:12 -0800

"Hey, we were watching that."

By: the other side

the other side — Sun, 18 Mar 2007 20:05:00 -0800

By: Nelson

Nelson — Sun, 18 Mar 2007 20:26:47 -0800

This unauthorized attack ad is brilliant. It's also a nasty piece of work. Gloves are comin' off early, and the Democrats will again eat their own.

By: interrobang

interrobang — Sun, 18 Mar 2007 20:57:41 -0800

Gloves are comin' off early, and the Democrats will again eat their own. Which is exactly what the Republicans who made this ad want you to think. Congratulations, Professor Credulous.

By: delmoi

delmoi — Sun, 18 Mar 2007 21:01:20 -0800

delmoi, yes I am. You need to get out more. Or maybe you could just watch a John Wayne or Bruce Willis movie. The people love those fantasies of a regular guy beating the crap out of people who are way too smart by half. Maybe you should pay attention to contemporary political news, rather then basing your analysis on decades old movies. If The Shawshank Redemption is one of the most popular movies of all time, why hasn't prison reform been one of the more salient political issues? Let's look at the political outlook promoted by the top ten movies according to IMDB:

1) The Godfather: (I actually havn't seen it, but it would seem to glorify criminals)
2) The Shawshank redemption: Be nicer to inmates, prison reform
3) The Godfather II: See #1
4) Buono, il brutto, il cattivo, Il: No idea
5) Lord of the rings: the return of the king: Um, evil is bad? Environmentalism?
6) Casablanca: none
7) Pulp Fiction: sometimes killing people is a good thing
8) Shildler's List: Genocide is bad
9) Star wars ESB: anti-authoritarianism
10) Seven Samurai: Fight for the little guy

Nothing really favors the republicans (unless you consider Republicans criminals like the heroes of The Godfather or Pulp Fiction) The shawshank redemption, LOTR, Star Wars, and The Seven Samurai all give off a democratic, fight for the little guy vibe. But like I said, trying to predict the 2008 general election based on what movies were popular decades ago is a dumb idea. In the real world, Republicans are afraid of Hillary Clinton. They've learned to respect her as a senator, and they know she has huge pull with the Ladies, who are going to put the Republicans at a 5% (at least) disadvantage during the general. She can outpoll both Guilliani and McCain today (and so can Barak). Saying that Americans are just going to vote for whoever seems stupider is ridiculous.

By: nanojath

nanojath — Sun, 18 Mar 2007 21:02:08 -0800

Congratulations, Professor Credulous. Oh please, interrobang. He's obviously part of it. I mean Nelson Minar? Hello, anagram?

By: amberglow

amberglow — Sun, 18 Mar 2007 21:03:59 -0800

Hillary and Obama have to knock each other out--they're vying for the exact same establishment DLC spot. As time goes by, they're even triangulating and avoiding in the same ways--see the recent Pace anti-gay stuff.

By: puke & cry

puke & cry — Sun, 18 Mar 2007 21:04:21 -0800

Yeah, this was probably made by republicans. There's already been several instances in the past couple months of republicans smearing one democrat and blaming it on another. This seems like the same kind of thing.

By: amberglow

amberglow — Sun, 18 Mar 2007 21:04:45 -0800

(and if you look at campaign staffs, you find (Bill) Clinton people equally distributed between them)

By: zennie

zennie — Sun, 18 Mar 2007 21:18:26 -0800

Weighing in just to say, I think I am too young to care about this either as a parody or as some kind of clever attack. I get it, and all, but I have no recollection of the original cultural wave this is riding. WYSIWYG demographic?

By: Target Practice

Target Practice — Sun, 18 Mar 2007 21:23:04 -0800

I wish people would stop with the YouTube links. Inevitably I wind up reading the YouTube comments. Including the one that talks about how both parties are in the thrall of a conspiracy on international bankers. ...incidentally, I didn't see anything in that video that says anything about Obama. The only reference to him is in the tags, and who knows if the person who posted it is the person who created it.

By: inconsequentialist

inconsequentialist — Sun, 18 Mar 2007 21:30:22 -0800

Barack Obama: He'll throw sledgehammers at your television.

By: stavrosthewonderchicken

stavrosthewonderchicken — Sun, 18 Mar 2007 21:45:21 -0800

a generational howl against Clinton's presidential bid

I saw the best posters of my generation destroyed by politics, commenting hysterical naked, scrolling themselves through the n-word threads at dawn looking for a snarky fix, trucker-hatted hipsters burning for the cheapest DSL connection to the bitwise dynamo in the datastream of night, who pizza and tater-tots and poopsocking and high sat up typing in the supernatural whiteness of rented condos surfing across the tubes of internets contemplating porn, who bared their breasts on MySpace under fake names and saw Mohammedan bombers threatening in video streams illuminated, who played through universities with radiant eyes hallucinating Second Life and Warcraft tragedy among the scholars of war, who were banned from the websites for crazy & posting batshitinsane on the Windows™ of the Bill, who farted in unshaven rooms in underwear, tossing their tissues in wastebaskets and listening to the Terror on CNN...

with apologies to Mr. G.

By: ZachsMind

ZachsMind — Sun, 18 Mar 2007 21:48:32 -0800

Thank you for the educational link SeizeThe Day, but msnbc already indulges my hysteria. Pretty much all news media indulges my hysteria. That's why I find it so entertaining. I saw a news report from YouTube which was originally broadcast last September. The 'front page' story? South Park was starting it's tenth season. I shit you not. Anyway, in that stirring example of 'journalism', either Trey Parker or Matt Stone (I can't tell the bastards apart) said that if you watched the episode Douch and Turd you'd know how they voted in the last election. After several years of hearing myself say that voting is a sacred honor and duty in this country, and it's the Americans who aren't voting that are screwing everything up cuz the system doesn't work if people don't vote, I'm about ready to join the Trey Parkers and the Matt Stones of this world and not vote ever again. Cuz they win. The system doesn't work. Rich people vote. And rich people convince others to vote with them by a lot of means but mostly they use capital - one way or the other they will pay to get the most votes to go their way. It's not a vote that counts in this country but a bunch of dollar bills in the same hand, and yes this election has already been decided. I'll be mildly surprised if either Obama or Clinton won this thing but if one of them did, it's because that person promised to get down on their knees when told and do what they're told to do when they're told to it, and pretend the idea was their own. They're just puppets. Shrub's just a puppet. Clinton was just a puppet. They've all just been puppets since Kennedy. Kennedy was probably a puppet who pulled on his own strings, and he had to be shot in the head. Have none of you seen The Bride of Chucky??? Cuz what do you do when the puppet starts talking back? You put him in his box and go seek therapy... Okay, the analogy kinda loses cohesion back there somewhere but you get the idea. Indulging my hysteria? How about waking up and smelling the fucking coffee?

By: acetonic

acetonic — Sun, 18 Mar 2007 21:51:11 -0800

I actually do see Hillary as a "Big Brother" type. She gave the the chills years ago when she, and Joe Lieberman, were running around talking how we have to make everything safe for the children. Videogames are only played by children, thus, no need for mature content right? I know she's only taken that route to appeal the the family values crowd, but I don't want a world where Tarantino is replaced by The Wiggles.

By: rfbjames

rfbjames — Sun, 18 Mar 2007 22:57:47 -0800

I think this would have been much better with Bush instead of Hillary. Have him talking about why he needs to tap phones and suspend rights...seems more appropriate given the 1984 motif.

By: ZachsMind

ZachsMind — Sun, 18 Mar 2007 23:09:42 -0800

Well. Voting hasn't worked thus far. So I'm gonna "vote different" by not voting. Won't make a difference, but it's one less errand I'll have to waste time doing that November. As a registered democrat living in Texas, my vote's never mattered anyway.

By: furiousxgeorge

furiousxgeorge — Mon, 19 Mar 2007 00:03:45 -0800

"This just looks like the donkeys are turning on their own..." Err, it's called a primary. I think the Republicans are going to have one too.

By: telstar

telstar — Mon, 19 Mar 2007 00:24:07 -0800

The 2008 political season. When the corpo-political state faces its first real challenge? I simply luv the fact that politial "blooper" reels are getting much better play on YouTube than the straight (read "brainwashing") political stuff.

By: SoftRain

SoftRain — Mon, 19 Mar 2007 01:42:14 -0800

delmoi: Are you seriously implying that Casablanca, the movie about how Rick Blaine, American isolationist has to learn to pick a side in an international conflict and come to the realization that his personal problems are much smaller than the bigger problems facing the world doesn't have a political outlook? Because that is pretty disingenuous. Also, wasn't Return of the King the LOTR one where the good white guys fought the swarthy evil guys from "the east"? Also, The Good, The Bad and The Ugly is a Western in which dudes with guns fight over some gold. I'm not sure if it really has a political standpoint, unless "the coolest guy should get the gold" is a political standpoint. And you could probably argue that The Godfathers, which are about basically doing "what needs to be done" even if it is totally bloody and being tough about it, are pretty anti-"bleeding heart" in sentiment. (It's been awhile, but that seemed to be the ethos I took from it. You know, "it's not personal, it's business.") I think it's fair to say that popular movies reflect popular sentiment, and that said sentiment is at least somewhat conservative.

By: konolia

konolia — Mon, 19 Mar 2007 05:24:14 -0800

I love this video because it amuses me and distracts me from the fact that there is not one single person running for President at present whom I would want to vote for. (If I were Democrat I'd like Obama, probably. )

By: five fresh fish

five fresh fish — Mon, 19 Mar 2007 08:22:47 -0800

So I'm gonna "vote different" by not voting. Don't be stupid. At the very least, vote for a protest party. If you don't vote, you don't count. If you vote for a protest party (we used to have the Rhino party in Canada; they promised beer) at least then the ruling parties will have a metric for the amount of dissatisfaction in the country.

By: five fresh fish

five fresh fish — Mon, 19 Mar 2007 08:25:12 -0800

Konolia, I can not for the life of me imagine why you'd feel a need to stay true to the Republicans, when they have so clearly been a complete disaster. Unless it's some sort of battered-wife syndrome thing: oh, don't hurt me any more, Republicans, don't beat me! I love you! I'll stay with you!

By: solistrato

solistrato — Mon, 19 Mar 2007 09:03:24 -0800

I look forward to electing some overprivileged yuppie to office.

By: teishu

teishu — Mon, 19 Mar 2007 09:56:14 -0800

Gen X is still the most cynical, and useless, generation in US existence probably cause we're a little quicker on the uptake to see when we're getting screwed and we just take our football and go home. the scope of conflict has narrowed to not include the vast majority of people in this country and as such, none of the "serious" candidates even come close to representing most of us.

By: konolia

konolia — Mon, 19 Mar 2007 10:53:12 -0800

What I meant was that if I was a liberal I'd like Obama.

By: amberglow

amberglow — Mon, 19 Mar 2007 11:48:43 -0800

Obama's not a liberal at all, konolia--he's very centrist. Hillary is slightly further to the right of him as of today. Edwards is a little to the left of both of them (and speaking far more clearly about everything). The only true liberal in the race is Kucinich and he has no chance.

By: amberglow

amberglow — Mon, 19 Mar 2007 11:50:19 -0800

more importantly--konolia, is the GOP crop too immoral for you?

By: konolia

konolia — Mon, 19 Mar 2007 12:09:00 -0800

Amberglow, I will never believe Hillary can even see a centrist position without binoculars no matter what she pretends to say. You could be right about Obama but he and I disagree on issues that I find important. But I do get the impression so far that he is a decent guy.

By: amberglow

amberglow — Mon, 19 Mar 2007 12:13:55 -0800

Look at all national polls, and that's where Hillary is, konolia--it's a cliche, but she's very poll-oriented and consultant-trained. Bill was no liberal either, but also very very centrist. I think they're all decent people on our side this time, except Biden.

By: amberglow

amberglow — Mon, 19 Mar 2007 12:15:15 -0800

actually i'm wrong--Hillary is to the right of most national polls, especially on foreign stuff and Iraq.

By: konolia

konolia — Mon, 19 Mar 2007 12:51:09 -0800

she's very poll-oriented and consultant-trained. I don't care for anyone who needs a poll to tell her what her opinions are. Give me someone who knows what they believe, knows what they think, knows what they want to do, and leaves it up to the electorate whether or not that's what they want.

By: delmoi

delmoi — Mon, 19 Mar 2007 13:32:49 -0800

Don't be stupid. At the very least, vote for a protest party. In texas, the democrats are a protest party.

By: delmoi

delmoi — Mon, 19 Mar 2007 13:34:40 -0800

Amberglow, I will never believe Hillary can even see a centrist position without binoculars no matter what she pretends to say. Do you follow politics at all? Hillary Clinton is practically a neo-con, and she was conservative in her youth (A "goldwater girl" I guess that means she was a segregation fan)

By: five fresh fish

five fresh fish — Mon, 19 Mar 2007 15:39:53 -0800

AFAIK none of your crop of potential winners is in any way liberal, leftist, or otherwise skewing toward what we in other nations would call "the left."

By: SeizeTheDay

SeizeTheDay — Mon, 19 Mar 2007 16:52:26 -0800

Hey, I'm pretty sure Kucinich is running again, fish.

By: amberglow

amberglow — Mon, 19 Mar 2007 17:02:16 -0800

fff is right tho--even Kucinich is not very liberal compared to other countries' politicians. Even rightwingers in most civilized countries support universal healthcare and most other liberal/progressive policies that we can only dream of (and work towards).

By: five fresh fish

five fresh fish — Mon, 19 Mar 2007 17:46:09 -0800

And Kunich is not a potential winner. Not any more likely to win than Vilsack.

By: mrgrimm

mrgrimm — Mon, 19 Mar 2007 18:31:29 -0800

If you vote for a protest party (we used to have the Rhino party in Canada; they promised beer) at least then the ruling parties will have a metric for the amount of dissatisfaction in the country. And that "metric" will affect the ruling and opposition parties' policies ... never ever. If voting is so important, why is it not mandatory? If the right to not vote is as important as the right to vote, they why do so many people go "postal" when you tell them you didn't vote? ...incidentally, I didn't see anything in that video that says anything about Obama. The only reference to him is in the tags, and who knows if the person who posted it is the person who created it. At the end of the video is an Apple logo transformed into the shape of an "O" with a Barack Obama URL. That video was horrible; an epitome of modern political advertisement. I was expecting something like the original 1984 commercial, completely redone with Hillary quotes and video clips. This was some Apple PR flack with a hour or so to kill. /grumpy

By: ZachsMind

ZachsMind — Mon, 19 Mar 2007 19:12:11 -0800

five fresh fish said, "If you don't vote, you don't count." I DON'T COUNT NOW AND I BEEN VOTING! WHERE THE HELL YOU BEEN? Tell you whut. Get a time machine. Go forward to election day. VOTE. Watch the outcome. Go back in time to election day. DON'T vote. Watch the outcome. Go ahead and do all that then come right back here. I'll wait. ... SAME FUCKIN' OUTCOME, WUZN'T IT??? I TOLD YOU SO! WHO'S YOUR DADDY!? WHO'S YOUR DADDY!!?

By: ZachsMind

ZachsMind — Mon, 19 Mar 2007 19:24:42 -0800

delmoi said, "In texas, the democrats are a protest party." I'm still waiting to wake up in the middle of the night to a twenty foot flaming cross on my front lawn. Some parts of Texas are still in the 1950s, and I ain't talkin' Leave It To Beaver. SeizeTheDay said, "Gen X is still the most cynical, and useless, generation in US existence" THIRTEENTH GENERATION thank you very much. We are the 13th generation since the birth of this nation. Those of us from the Atari shank of that generation are rapidly approaching forty. It's the Nintendo crowd that are twenty somethings and lower thirty somethings. Oh. And yes we are cynical. And useless. And we're damn proud of it.

By: five fresh fish

five fresh fish — Mon, 19 Mar 2007 19:54:13 -0800

Chill pills, Zach, don't forget to take your chill pills.

By: oaf

oaf — Mon, 19 Mar 2007 21:51:29 -0800

This apparently merited a discussion on tonight's NBC Nightly News.

By: oaf

oaf — Mon, 19 Mar 2007 22:05:29 -0800

If you don't vote, you don't count. In 99.9% of races, if you vote for someone who's not a Republican or a Democrat, you don't count. (There are really only two choices, maximum, in just about all Canadian ridings, too. Voting Conservative in Trinity—Spadina will get you about as far as voting NDP in Avalon.)

By: oaf

oaf — Mon, 19 Mar 2007 22:08:37 -0800

(...or anything but Conservative anywhere in Alberta.)

By: five fresh fish

five fresh fish — Tue, 20 Mar 2007 08:48:29 -0800

It's like you people feel that if the person you voted for does not win, your vote was wasted. That is anti-democracy thinking.

By: phearlez

phearlez — Tue, 20 Mar 2007 10:52:42 -0800

trucker-hatted hipsters burning for the cheapest DSL connection to the bitwise dynamo in the datastream of night, I really want to make out with stravros right now. Maybe it's the latent homo-content from Mr Ginsburg leaking through. that was seriously awesome.

By: owhydididoit

owhydididoit — Wed, 21 Mar 2007 16:13:58 -0800

The lame counterpoint.

By: amberglow

amberglow — Wed, 21 Mar 2007 17:04:04 -0800

I Made the "Vote Different" Ad ...The campaigns had no idea who made it--not the Obama campaign, not the Clinton campaign, nor any other campaign. I made the ad on a Sunday afternoon in my apartment using my personal equipment (a Mac and some software), uploaded it to YouTube, and sent links around to blogs. The specific point of the ad was that Obama represents a new kind of politics, and that Senator Clinton's "conversation" is disingenuous. And the underlying point was that the old political machine no longer holds all the power. ...

By: caddis

caddis — Wed, 21 Mar 2007 18:56:34 -0800

It could be an interesting campaign if we see more of this. I like Obama, he seems honest and has great charisma, but he is just a baby. Richardson seems like he has the gravitas, a great stand on the issues and good experience, but no one seems to know who he is. His organization sucks. I wish I had the skills to make a cool video like this for him, if only to get him out there and noticed so he can be debated fairly.

By: caddis

caddis — Wed, 21 Mar 2007 19:35:12 -0800

The author steps forward.

By: Nelson

Nelson — Wed, 21 Mar 2007 19:39:53 -0800

Well, Captain Conspiracy, you were wrong; the video was made by a Democrat.

By: amberglow

amberglow — Wed, 21 Mar 2007 20:23:28 -0800

big Edwards announcement tomorrow--i hope Elizabeth's ok.

By: Blazecock Pileon

Blazecock Pileon — Thu, 22 Mar 2007 05:16:49 -0800

The author gets fired.

By: IronLizard

IronLizard — Thu, 22 Mar 2007 10:27:23 -0800

Well now, that sucks. Maybe the GOP will hire him?

By: amberglow

amberglow — Fri, 23 Mar 2007 04:16:55 -0800

It was stupid of him to be freelancing in the same exact area that his company operates--i can't believe he didn't realize it would come back to bite him.

By: amberglow

amberglow — Fri, 23 Mar 2007 07:46:15 -0800

ah! it's a retread: Apparently, Big Brother wasn't watching. The YouTube ad that is being hailed/denounced as creating a Brave New World of Internet viral political campaigning was a complete rip-off. Check out Connecticut for Joe. It was hardly noticed and got less than 1,000 hits. ...